Chess is an ancient game of skill that has become internationally standardized with the exception of the chess pieces. The designs of chess pieces are, therefore, variable and independently developed to appeal to the cultural preferences of various markets. The most popular are tribute to figures representative of historical eras. This historical theme is apparent to the Staunton chess set that is traditionally used in many chess tournaments. Said tradition, however, was circumstantially initiated, accordingly the Staunton design was not selected because it was particularly attractive, internationally appropriate or significantly relevant to the game of chess. The first international tournament was organized and held in England. The invited participants would naturally be distracted and confused if a variety of chess sets were permitted, and so the English Staunton chess set was thus elected to be exclusively used to play the middle eastern game of chess, in an international tournament. This choice, however, was not made to everyone's satisfaction nor did it appeal to thousands of casual chess players, who were free to choose their own chess sets, and still do to date. Thus, the lack of a universally acceptable chess set, thus encourages the production of a wide variety of chess sets that perpetuates the distraction and confusion for players using unfamiliar chess pieces and creates a particular hardship for novices attempting to learn the game of chess with any of the irrelevantly symbolic and/or hydrogenous chess sets that have been developed to date.
1. Field of the Invention
As the passing millenniums have failed to relieve the repetitious hardships by providing a universally relevant chess set, an endless array of representative cultural, political and military themes have filled the void and compound the confusion whereby any subject is now considered as being appropriate. In fact, however, themes representative of any subject other than chess itself are actually irrelevant fragments of the ancient history of chess. It is, therefore, the objective of the present invention to overcome the cited disadvantages by successfully providing a chess set that is universally appropriate, impartially prestigious, authentically relevant and an obvious tribute to the enduring history of the game of chess itself. This criteria is achieved by providing a method of structuring chess pieces to functionally embody the classic radial symmetry linearly formed by the genuine distinctive moves of the respective chess pieces, to thus form chess pieces as regal scepters proclaiming their definitively entitled directional mobility, as eminently displayed, to authentically indicate their respectively relevant directional mobility, as is conformingly permitted on the correspondingly defined vertical, horizontal and diagonal rows of a chess board. These scepter-like configurations thus retain the established appeal of historical themes by personifying the regal authority of their traditionally associated titles. This method of relevantly structuring the chess pieces is also discernible as a classic tribute to the game of chess itself, a combination that assures broad inducement for enthusiastic acceptance of said pieces as a universally appropriate, authentically relevant and impartially equable standard chess set, including the pawn as a chess piece.
The presentation of said pieces as an eminent tribute to chess would obviously be accepted by chess players recognizing the authentic association. A novice, however, will perceive said association as a visual reference determining the relevant corresponding rows of a chess board, said pieces are thus permitted to directional move along, to thereby elevate the notorious burden of learning and remembering the respective directional mobility the various chess pieces are permitted. The proficient players will also occasionally utilize said pieces as a comparatively simple and pleasant method of providing fundamental chess instruction to a novice, who in turn, would thus be encouraged to reciprocally volunteer to teach other novices using the same simplified method whereby the appreciatively expanding number of new players will also expedite the ultimate free acceptance of said pieces as a relevant, universally equable, standard chess set.
2. Description of Related Art
The dire need for a relevant chess set has inspired consistent rumors of the existence of instructive indicators incorporated within chess pieces, however, the prior art only serves to emphasize the complexities that have reduced said rumors to wishful thinking for thousands of years. The Lesavoy Patent 628,412 is a conglomerate example, whereby esthetics were abandoned in an extreme effort to be instructive. The end result basically being the head piece of a historical figure affixed on top of a prominent numerical body, trailing a diagram behind. Obviously intended as a beginners chess set (page 3, lines 57-64) and thus blatantly stigmatized it would be quickly shunned, if used at all. Thus its use is temporary and limited and its instructive value is also faulty. The numbered bodies are not visible when used as instructed on page 2, lines 60-65 and as shown in the drawings. Regardless, however, only the pawn is conventionally numbered. However, the distance a pawn may travel is improper as page 2, lines 70-72 state a pawn "in any case be moved one square". This is incorrect as chess rules permit the pawn a two square move from its original position. The statement concerning chess men on page 2, lines 93-100 is also misleading as "any No." thus permits chessmen "to at any time move any number of squares desired" this would instruct a beginner to move chessmen to pass over other chessmen if desired, in conflict with the rules of chess. Thus, Lesavoy's chessmen would create conflicting confusion for a novice due to their inaccuracies if it were intended as an internationally standard permanent chess set, as is the present invention.
The Mather's Patent 3,677,550, as well as the Epton U.S. Pat. No. Des. 195,578, have eliminated historical reference and also example the historically complex problems involved when symbolically attempting to represent the respective directional mobility of chessmen as presented in said patents. The symbols of both presentations are in a horizontal plane more suited to checkers than chessmen. The orientation of these portable chessmen to assure proper use, is totally avoided. If orientation was resolved, however, the symbols provided would still be irrelevant thus leaving the directional mobility as subject to the viewers misinterpretations.
The Mather's patent has titled FIG. 2 as a rook. A rook may move forwardly or rearwardly away from or toward the player along columns of squares; or laterally along rows of squares stated "vertically" or "horizontally". The drawing, however, shows that a two directional perpendicular move is permitted in one of four directions, a two directional move is only permitted to a knight. Thus, the bishop of FIG. 4 would better serve as a rook if so oriented. The circle of FIG. 3 is not representative of any chess move, but is rather appropriate of the frustrations encountered. The primary move of the pawn is forward, this is not shown or mentioned. Accordingly, said chessmen are irrelevant and create hardship.
The Epton patent makes no disclosure of directional mobility or orientation if it had, it would be lacking as FIG. 3 and FIG. 11 are meaningless and FIG. 5 is distorted to marginally avoid duplication of FIG. 1 they, therefore, are not relevantly functional.
U.S. Pat. Nos. Des. 204,142 and 217,479 do not disclose or claim they are more than ornamental chessmen and, therefore, like ink blots the viewer may interpret any portion of a design thereon to be imaginatively meaningful without limit. Therefore, it is specious to assume the viewer is more astute then the inventor and it is thereby conceded that speculation will not viably provide more than ornamental chessmen as stated by the inventors thereof.